SATURDAY PM/SUNDAY AM, 5TH UPDATE: Here’s how the North American box office is shaping up for this weekend based on Friday, Saturday, weekend and cumulative grosses. It was an overall $129 million weekend, which is still down (-12%) compared to last year’s fired-up Alice In Wonderland3D totals.

Sony Pictures’ PG-13 sci-fi actioner Battle: Los Angeles opened as the big #1 this weekend with $13.5M Friday and +2% for $13.7M Saturday. With the studio claiming the pic only cost $70M (I don’t buy it), it met the lower end of expectations of weekend grosses around $36M. That’s Sony’s fourth consecutive #1 film debut this year following The Green Hornet, Just Go With It and The Roommate. The film received a “B” overall CinemaScore, but an “A” from young men under age 18 and an “A-” from all moviegoers under 25. Directed by Jonathan Liebesman, produced by Neal Moritz and Ori Marmur, and written by Chris Bertolini, the pic had a very fresh-looking marketing campaign overseen by Jeff Blake and Marc Weinstock with exec Doug Belgrad. It didn’t hurt that the studio also generated a lot of press timed to the anniversary of an actual 1942 UFO sighting in Los Angeles that prompted a full military response including an all-out assault along the coast with artillery. Fast forward to nowadays: sorry, but I suspect that LA would be the last place on earth to become the last stand for mankind. (Dogs or dolphins, yes. Mankind, no.) The film opened day and date in 33 territories this weekend, including Mexico, Russia, Korea, and the UK, and earned $16.7M with mostly #1 debuts, for a worldwide total of $52.7M.

Warner Bros’ unfortunately titled Red Riding Hood performed much softer than the predicted weekend of $20M — only $14.1M. (Every time I saw a trailer, it reminded me of M. Night Shyamalan’s dreadful The Village…) It failed to meet even the studio’s lowered expectations Friday and Saturday as Spring Break begins to kick off. Teen girls, for whom the $39M-budget movie was aimed, never showed up in the droves that Warner Bros had hoped since director Catherine Hardwicke couldn’t attract her Twilight fans (teen girls and their moms). Not even an American Idol marketing integration ploy helped. The film was positioned as a re-imagined haunting of a classic legend complete with love triangle, which was treated as a secondary element throughout the marketing campaign compared to highlighting the “Who Is The Wolf?” mystery. Though the film was counter-programming the male-targeted Battle: Los Angeles, Warner Bros hoped to engage males on a secondary level. But, c’mon, what guy is going to a movie titled Red Riding Hood?

But the movie that Hollywood was talking about all weekend was Disney’s Mars Needs Moms 3D. Why? Because the Dick Cook leftover wound up one of the biggest money losers of all time. It cost $150M but, even with the higher 3D ticket prices, it pulled in the pittance of only $6.8M this weekend — that’s right all weekend. “It’s about as bad of an animated miss as possible,” one rival studio exec emailed me. It’s rare that any Disney toon flops at all, much less this badly, even though it’s based on the book by author and illustrator Berkeley Breathed, the Pulitzer Prize winner for his comic strip “Bloom County”. But my insiders say this movie is why, after Rich Ross screened it, Disney a year ago shuttered Robert Zemeckis’ Imagemovers Digital, which also produced the blockbuster Disney’s A Christmas Carol. (Of course, Cook’s slate also included that as well as last year’s huge moneymakers Alice In Wonderland and Toy Story 3). It opened in 14 territories overseas, repping 25% of the international market, and made just $2.1M.

189 Comments

Written By • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

That MARS NEEDS MOMS animation style is the creepiest ever. When are they going to figure out that no one likes looking at this process? Hopefully after MARS NEEDS MOMS’ miserable weekend. Knock it off already, RZ!

Jesse • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

I wouldn’t say that it isn’t the animation style that is the problem. I personally believe that the Uncanny Valley Theory is a load of crap. Mars Needs Moms’ biggest problem was that it looked like a big, giant, steaming pile of shit. People deserve to get fired for even thinking that this film was a good idea.

Anonymous • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Creepy is right. It’s canned the “uncanny valley” (google it) And it’s the same reason Polar Express, Beowulf and A Christmas Carol all flopped.

Jesse • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

First of all, The Polar Express did not bomb. It was actually financially successful. And Beowulf and A Christmas Carol didn’t flop either, they didn’t light the box office on fire and they were underwhelming at the box office, but they still made back their production budgets. Mars Needs Moms on the other hand, not that’s a bomb.

Also the Uncanny Valley Theory is a load of crap IMO. The reason why Zemeckis’ more recent films and the rest of ImageMover’s film slate has underperformed or bombed, along with other films that have used this style of animation such as Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within, is not because of the animation style. It’s because those films were well….crappy. People don’t want to go see films that look like they are cinematic pieces of crap. The animation style of motion capture films has nothing to do with the rather horrid quality of these films. Bad scripts, bad stories, bad characters, bad voice acting, etc. are much bigger problems with these films than the animation style.

J.R. • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

It IS the animation… waxy, creepy characters are a turn off, plain and simple. My boy nearly shits his pants when that “mars mom” trailer plays on Disney channel… can’t say I blame him because I DO shit my pants.

Anytime those trailers ran for these movies at the theaters, people squirmed in their seats.

Sometimes something that looks bad, IS bad.

Jesse • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

If you made the Polar Express, Beowulf, Mars Meets Moms, etc. in any other way that isn’t motion capture animation (live action, Disney styled traditional animation, anime, Pixar/Dreamworks styled CGI animation, you name it), those films would still be awful.

Maybe if they made a good motion capture animation film and people still hated it, I would admit you’d have a point. But pretty much all of them suck to begin with, which is why I lean towards the reason why these films bombing/underperforming is simply because they’re bad films to begin with.

perplexed • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

I have a pretty solid foundation in 3D CGI and the animation style creeps me out as well. Star Wars: Clone Wars also has an odd animation style that just ruined it for me before I watched a single episode.

HappyDance • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Dudes, you’re both right; the Zemeckis animation movies are both creepy looking AND have sucky scripts.

They assume you don’t need writers when you have 150 mil in effects, and they are too arrogant to listen when audiences tell them that the Moving Wax Figures With Dead Eyes belong in a horror flick and not in comedies. Or dramas. Or any genre, period.

Let me ask you…… What if Pixar made Up* with the same motion capture tech/process as that used for Mars Needs Moms? How about The Incredibles in motion capture? Would they still be as adorable? Still as successful?

Hell no. It’d be way too creepy watching a realistically wrinkly old man talk and move artificially, unnaturally. We are predisposed to feel repulsed by natural-looking things and people that are ever so slightly off.

Wiki fun fact: Up’s director made it a point to make the characters more caricatured, as to avoid the uncanny valley effect that made the humans in Toy Story a bit creepy.

dosu • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

“What of Pixar…”. Wait till you see John Carter of Mars…

the black chick... • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

YES, IT IS THE ANIMATION STYLE.

The eyes look dead and that’s creepy. Far worse films have done good business because they were pretty to look at (Alice in Wonderland & Transformers 1 and 2).

Imagemovers other films (Polar Express) did the little business it did because of the good story. However, they could have done MUCH better if they had figured out how to fix the dead eye problem.

RogerCfromSD • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

As an animator, I disagree with your assertion that the animation style didn’t contribute to the less than resounding success of those animated films.

One of the most important aspects of Animations is APPEAL.

If the art style is unappealing or “creepy,” then the audience will not like it.

It’s one of Disney’s “Twelve Basic Principles of Animation.”

Toons • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Mo cap is creepy; I don’t care if you’re in animation. It’s like a French chef serving brains as a “delicacy” at KFC. The audience is voting with their feet, but hey, go ahead and keep churning out that weird looking stuff, it’s not like anyone’s going to see it.

Interesting that the least creepy characters in Mars…Moms are the cartoonish looking aliens don’t. Trillions of people appreciate Michelangelo, Vermeer and DaVinci; realistic looking painters, but created by hand with soul, not cold, creepy mo cap.

ari • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

None of those films made their profits (if any) at the box office. Motion capture still isn’t near perfection, even after the success of AVATAR. The facial movements and particularly the eyes still aren’t convincing. The directors that embrace these technologies want to be part of the next best thing at the expense of drama. Look at the faces of Brando, Streep, DeNiro, Bardem and other greats at key moments and it is easy to see what is lost.

voted against carter • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

The REAL problem is a COMBINATION of BOTH.

If the story is GREAT I can over look the “Uncanny Valley Theory” to a point

And by the way AVATAR looks like big blue Smurfs that were definably “Uncanny Valley Theory”.

IE BADLY RENDERED.

I was creeped out the WHOLE film.

I havent’ been able to watch it since.

I really liked the story line against big bad government and the
Navi trying to save their home against the oppressive socialist state though.

I always thought Jimmy Cameron was a Liberal????

But thats probably just me.

Mike • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

And can’t we admit that “The Adjustment Bureau” is a bit of a flop too. After what is it, 3 or 4 flops in a row, Damon has obviously lost his touch. Although without The Bourne Identity franchise was he ever really a big star to begin in with or just another media sensation like George Clooney?

Lloyd Rutzky • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Mike, maybe you missed it but Matt Damon is in “True Grit”, decidedly not a “flop”, in fact a gigantic hit, and the highest grossing Coen Brothers movie ever. And “The Adjustment Bureau” is not “a bit of a flop”. Maybe it’s not a blockbuster, but it’s modestly budgeted, was #1 it’s first weekend, and had a decent second weekend. “Hereafter”, I’ll admit, did poorly, but it also was modestly budgeted.

Rish Outfield • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Agreed. You don’t know how many times my kids have woke me screaming in the middle of the night that the dead-eyed characters from THE POLAR EXPRESS were in their closet.

I try to convince them that it’s just the boogeyman, but it seldom works.

Written By • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Thank you for this post. It made me laugh and laugh and laugh. :-)

mark meldrum • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

<>

Right and your kids are 35.

lsb • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

They have figured it out, Disney bought Imagemovers, then renamed it Imagemovers Digital, then they didn’t just cut ties with it they shut it down.

HappyDance • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

The Zemeckis animation style is horrendous, just like the creepy train movie and the horrid Christmas Carol. Pixar manages to make animation and 3D look cute while Zemeckis makes these nightmare inducing ghoulish computer things that look like mannequins come to life.

C. weintraub • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Has anyone else noticed that everything Dan Fogler acts in, seems to not only under-perform, but ends on a disastrous scale financially?

Moritz Wants More-titz • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

I’d still rather see MARS than any of the other films that opened this weekend…

At least it was a story we hadn’t seen before… that’s right, i’m looking at your Battlefield Earth — I mean, Los Angeles.

mfan • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

I’m happy Disney is going to take a spanking. I don’t support them anymore. They have either gutlessly cancelled “Wings”, which I have been waiting for, or they are waiting to see how Miley’s other movie’s do to see if she can still bring in good box office. I’m on strike against everything Disney until I get my movie. If it never comes, then I think Universal theme parks are not a bad place to visit.

Thanks for the first approximate look at the weekend results, Nikki.

Really Rich Ross, Really? • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

I love that Alice, Pirates 4, TRON and Toy Story 3 are all Rich Ross and MT Carney yet When In Rome and Mars Needs Moms are assigned to Dick Cook.

Cook & Aviv left you Disney a solid slate and all Ross knows how to do is The Disney Channel (PROM)

mfan • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Still waiting to see what big budget, original film Rich Ross will greenlight. Meleficent, or 20,000 Leagues, or something else that was already in developement doesn’t count.

md3 • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Exactly. By the Way, MT Carney was not at Disney when Alice in Wonderland or When in Rome came out.

c4x • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Not that I planned to see it, but I thought Mars Needs Moms seemed cute enough. Maybe they should have saved it for Mother’s Day weekend.

Lala • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Yeah, cute. Just what every child wants to see; their mother taken away from them, kidnapped to outer space. nightmares much?

QMF • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Dead/Missing mothers is a Disney trademark, isn’t it? (Bambi, etc…)

Katherine • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

That was one of the best things about the Incredibles, they didn’t kill the mom!

Captain Awesome • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Battle LA was fun as hell. A packed crowd this afternoon. Not surprised about Red Riding bombing. The script was horrible an early cut tested very poorly.

Sally in Chicago • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Why does Nik not think that $70Mil is the true budget….seems realistic if you were low-balling the actors. And it was filmed in LA? right? Maybe the sets were already built.

Spacelamb • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Apparently most of it was filmed in Louisiana due to local tax-breaks.

LA • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

On this film the above tJust the production process itself and the fact that it was a true studio production (columbia). Trust me, thats expensive.

A $15M indy can turn into a $35M production through the studio system real quick. And that would be for an easy film to shoot. Take this film, run it through their system. $100M forsure, maybe more. Then add more for P & A (which they spent A LOT on). They need $150M to break even id say.

LA 2.0 • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Sorry, typo.

Just the production process itself and the fact that it was a true studio production (columbia). Trust me, thats expensive.

A $15M indy can turn into a $35M production through the studio system real quick. And that would be for an easy film to shoot. Take this film, run it through their system. $100M forsure, maybe more. Then add more for P & A (which they spent A LOT on). They need $150M to break even id say.

truth • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

The truth is, all of these public domain scripts are almost always written by scribes who are incapable of putting forth an original work that makes people stand up and pay attention. Yes, established properties are easier to sell, but you’ll never see their original work make waves, because they have no voice.

intrestedparty • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Are you talking about the spate of “literary fairy tale” spin-offs that have been sold as unaided awareness high concept ideas for teen girls? Who thought this was going to work? Are teen girls just baked over babies wanting to be terrified by the fairy tales of their toddler years? because tim burton did it in 3D with Alice, they all would work? that was burton and well timed 3D. Hope this doesn’t get put on Amanda S’s head when none of these will, would ever work. When will this laziness end?

bill • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Wait a second. This script was on the vaunted Black List so don’t say it was crap. That would imply that all these Ivy educated development people don’t know what makes a good script or a successful movie. Then the studio heads would have to clean house and get rid of all these young people who got jobs by knowing their relatives and kissing the ass of higher ups.

Red Riding Hood is one more case of what is truly wrong with Hollywood. They’re all chasing the next Twilight because it was successful and the folks in development all think they are smart enough to know what the next Twilight is going to be. Even though the same people all passed on the real Twilight when it went into turnaround 5 years ago. And the scripts on the “Black List” with the exception of Juno and The Social Network (a film that shouldn’t have even been included on the list in the first place since it was always being developed by Sony) have tanked to one degree or another.

The D people in Hollywood don’t know what they’re doing!!!

hi ho • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

yeah that’s what i want to know — what happens now with the “snow white” derby? both films are cast, uni has already spent a few million on theirs, but now red riding hood craps out… is the casting of kristin stewart enough to give them the confidence to proceed? do the twi-hards that didn’t show for RRH stay loyal to kristin or was it never about kristin? tough greenlight decision for uni. less concerned about the cheaper relativity one. thoughts?

Brian • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Totally agree about the animation style. It does look creepy.

Maybe I’m naive but if he’s going for photorealism why not just film it live-action?

Anonymous • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

..does this means that the Disney/Imagemovers remake of “The Yellow Submarine” is dead in the water?

Anonymous • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

I really hope so. This is the first time that I have heard of a Yellow Submarine remake and, being a fan of the original, I don’t think that anyone can do it as well as the Beatles. Anything else would almost be a crime against music in general. Please hollywood, just leave this one alone. I know it’s hard for you to do when something might make money, but for all that is good, just leave this one alone.

Hunter D. • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

You do know that Beatles had nothing to do with that film, right? And one would assume their original music would still be used in the remake…

Anonymous • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

If by “nothing to do with” you mean “appearing live in and writng new songs for ” then yes, you are completely correct.

Hunter D. • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Wait…you’re right, according to IMDb (though the page for the film is a mess). I coulda sworn that this film was made using different voice actors and the Beatles music. Maybe I’m confusing it with Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Heart’s Club Band.

Jesus • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

The Beatles were not excited about the Yellow Submarine project at all. They thought, fairly enough, that it was going to be a cheesy kiddie friendly Saturday morning type cartoon. That’s one of the reasons the songs are pulled from previous albums and leftovers they had sitting around at the time. It’s also why they didn’t voice their own characters. They had very little to do with the movie in general.

However, upon seeing the nearly finished cut, they apparently loved the film and agreed to a rushed shoot to film the “All Together Now” ending of the film.

ari • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

The Beatles had nothing to do with YELLOW SUBMARINE? They didn’t want to get specifically involved in the production but it was their music, their characters, that made the movie. Since it was animated, what other involvement was necessary?

Will • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Not quite true — Disney and IMD had to get the approval from all surviving Beatles and family before they started on the film/test. The movie is still in the works.

ari • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Apple actually started their own version of YELLOW SUBMARINE in the late nineties. Internal conflicts at that time stopped the momentum of the project, until now. The remaining Beatles and the families have a veto power arrangement, if they don’t unanimously agree on something they do not proceed.

brian • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

The animation is not the problem here. The movie looks terrible. My kid (he is 4) does not want to see it. They did not win him over with the horrible story and the horrible trailer.

paul • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Jesse and Brian,

This is not an either/or situation. The script can be bad AND the animation can be creepy. Glimmer is a floor wax AND a desert topping.

Jersktore Jimmy • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

It’s Shimmer. Here: I’ll spray some on your mop. And some on my butterscotch pudding.

Erik Bruhwiler • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Regarding Mars anim tech, Cameron showed how to do it right with Avatar. Spielberg and Jackson picked up Cameron’s tech for TinTin. It is the only way to go (i.e. Dedicated face capture.)

Doug • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Yes, I couldn’t stand seeing those Mars Needs Moms characters even in 30 second ads. Most unappealing animation since “Delgo.”

Nick • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

The Village was a deliberate Red Riding Hood riff, I believe. Except Bryce Dallas’ cloak was yellow and the “bad” color was red.

blueswan • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Yes, I think you’re right. (And not surprised if RRH opened soft. I like Amanda S. but this movie looks horrendous.)

idiot • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

it was nothing like red riding hood you moron

SPM Belltown • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

When I watched “The Village” I never had the sense that it was related to Red Riding Hood at all. But about 20 minutes into the movie I started to have the suspicion that “The Village” was actually a remake of Roger Corman’s “Teenage Caveman”. And son-of-a-gun, whaddya know… it kinda was.

Hunter D • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Wish it were a remake of Larry Clark’s Teenage Cavemen.

sugar • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

I didn’t think of Red Riding Hood when I saw “The Village”, but now that you mention it – young girl in a cloak, going off into the big bad woods, a monster on the loose? I can see it.

Anonymous • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

So Bob Zemeckis the Billion Dollar Director is now a big loser in the eyes of Disney. Well that makes sense after all what does Zemeckis know about what audiences like? Clearly the geniuses at Disney are much smarter than he is. They are the ones to blame for this box office disaster they stupidly chose this release date. The movie is a lot of fun and if it had a better release date it would have done really well. They should have saved it for June or even Thanksgiving or Christmas. A perfect example of a good movie being completely destroyed by the studio’s idiotic choice of a terrible opening day. They made this worse because they knew long ago what the competition would be. They should have moved it to June and announced they were doing this because they like the movie so much that they think it should open when the kids start summer vacation. But by all means let’s blame Zemeckis for this fiasco. It’s obviously his fault the man’s a moron he should be run out of town on a rail and forbidden to ever return why did we love him so much anyway? All he ever makes are weird 3-D CGI movies where the characters have “dead eyes” so buh-bye Bob and good riddance don’t let the door hit you on the way out you terrible horrible awful no good bad man you!

Rish Outfield • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Art thou a troll? Nobody on here suggested Zemeckis is an idiot or should be kicked out of Hollywood. The man made my all-time favorite film back in 1985, and I think it’s a shame he doesn’t make movies like that anymore. But it’s funny how somebody can say, “I liked Eddie Murphy more when he made R-rated comedies,” and somebody interprets it as, “Oh, you hate Eddie Murphy now.”

Hunter D. • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

But I think it’s pretty clear that every sane person DOES hate Eddie Murphy now.

Anonymous • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Zemeckis is an idiot and should be run out of town…

mfan • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

I believe the basic problem is having a movie meant for little kids in which someone’s mother gets kidnapped. There is a reason you have never seen this plot in a kid’s movie before. Because it seems the perfect recipe for Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome. Maybe next they can make a little kid’s movie about the kid’s parents being murdered by a serial axe murderer, and having the surviving child hunt down the murderer. Moronic! A different release date wouldn’t change the plot, or the box office results.

Kay • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

That’s sort of the origin story of Batman, isn’t it? Kid sees his parents gunned down before his eyes by a robber. Of course, the whole point is that the Batman story was for older teens/adults. You’re absolutely right that a story about Mom Leaving/Dying is the worst thing you can do to a kid. You’re incorrect, however, that there never was a movie with that sort of trauma before–My parents still shudder when they think of Bambi. In that respect, Disney never learns.

Hunter D. • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Except Bambi is an all time classic, in large part BECAUSE of the murdered mother.

Lizzie • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Do you never go to children’s movies? BABE’s mother was taken away and butchered. Bambi’s mom was shot. Harry Potter’s mother was murdered. Cinderella and Snow White’s mothers are dead, and their step-mothers are abusive/homocidal narcissists. The Lemony Snicket kids are orphans. Heck, even Nancy Drew’s mom is dead.

Lizzie • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

P.S. There actually IS a movie about a kid’s parents being murdered by a serial murderer, and the kid having to hunt down the villain. It’s Harry Potter.

mfan • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

People, people. Hearing about something in the narration, and even having it done with emotionally distancing animals is not the same at all. Older kids can handle it better, a la Batman. But Batman is someone who went somewhat nuts because of his post traumatic stress.

mde • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Mars animation style is a problem, but the biggest problem was the marketing. Terrible shots in the commercials. Poor humor. Earnest plot. Tired music. Their approach was totally wrong. If the movie has a 150 production cost, 50 million marketing. Could this be Disney’s biggest flop since the Alamo?

Deeds • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

I love how people say that the Robert Zemeckis animation looks so realistic. It’s animation. It is not supposed to look real. It’s supposed to look animated. This style is super creepy. Just like Polar Express and Beowulf.

Anonymous • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Battle LA is fun. Black Hawk Down meets War of The Worlds!

danny666 • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

The Mars Needs Mom looked creepy. Esepecially the original trailer. I know it’s from Disney but I don’t think it could pull itself into it’s rightful place as another Astro Boy, from Summitt, that made 6 million.(which was actually an okay movie.)
Red Riding Hood, I’m trying to figure out what makes that picture any different than Season of the Witch and earn above the 10 million that film made. Oh it has Chloe’s Amanda Seyfried, what a draw. Not.
Battle LA looked great and there was no reason to think it could make 30 Plus million that Wolfman and Perry Jackson made about the same time last year.

Canyon • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Um, what parent wants to take their kids to see a movie, where the parents are kidnapped and take to another planet… HELLO NIGHTMARES!

Disney is in the shit hole, lets face it….. Alice and Wonderland and Toy Story 3 hid what was a terrible 2010, and the magic ain’t back this year.

Every division needs a retool, starting with production and ending with the boring approach to Marketing.

AJ • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

I’m not a parent, but “nightmares” is exactly what I thought of when I saw the trailer.

“Uncanny Valley” arguments aside, a movie that looks so realistic about a kid who’s mom is kidnapped by aliens just sounds like a bad idea.

Incredulous • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

So what you are saying is that if it weren’t for the massive hits they’d be doing horribly. Makes a lot of sense.

4 of the top 12 are Disney… more than any other studio. sure, sure, all those movies cost a pretty penny, but there it is. also feel free to include Iron Man 2 in that bunch for a future investment into Marvel products

dudette • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

amanda seyfield looks great in the film. but she’s not really a pull for anyone. she’s just yet another actress in the sea of random blond actresses that pop up every couple of years.

gary oldman looked like he was back to hamming it up again like he did in francis ford coppola’s frankenstein back in the 90s.

given the facts (trailer sucks, title sucks, tested poorly). it’s amazing that the film might come out just shy of 20M.

the problem with doing stories based on fairy tales is that no one over the age of 6 is really interested. but hats off to hardwicke for being one of the few female directors making genre movies. but maybe if she were more of a genre fan the films would be better.

John • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Gary was Dracula, not Frankenstein.

It’d be really nice if he could get an Academy-Award-nominee worthy role again.

dudette • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

yes, you’re right. i was thinking dracula and writing frankenstein.

oldman was great in his early indie films. but i guess people have to earn a living.

LOL • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Laughing at the people that thought this was going to be another Twilight. Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!Laughing harder at the SHiloh Fernandez interviews where he was bracing for a Robert Pattinson-like fame.
.
First of all, I knew something was up, when the ‘supposed’ male lead was not shown at all in the trailers.
.
Imagine a Twilight trailer NOT showing Edward Cullen.
.
I knew it meant that either there was no chemistry between the two leads, Seyfred and Fernandez or that one or both, sucked.
.
At it’s core Twilight is a ROMANCE, between a vampire and a young girl. They will essentially die for each other. A ‘genre’ romeo and juliet.
.
What, about this movie, conveyed THAT? In the Riding hood trailers, you saw Seyfred’s big bug eyes, a red cape, foggy forest shots (only thing similar to Twilight), Gary Oldman, and villagers in some medieval looking town acting worried and running all over.
.
Finally – if you want to know the honest truth? Red Riding Hood was F*CKING CREEPY. A perverted cross dressing wolf, eats grandma puts on her cap and nightgown, and lures the granddaughter into bed with him. I thought it was horrible and distasteful at 6 years old. Why would I pay to see that sh*t now? LOL

Mochi • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Disney made the right choice in parting ways with IMD. That said, my 7yo nephew thought the Mars trailer was hilarious and I’m sure he’ll love the film.

Derp • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Producer:
I have a script for a kids’ movie about martians who kidnap and kill human mothers. We’re gonna do it in that creepy animation style everyone hates. Oh, and it’s going to cost you $150M+

Disney Executive:
I smell a winner! God, I’m so good at my job!

Parabola • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Producer:

I have a script for a kids’ movie about a bunch of antique hand puppets I’m creepily obsessed with. It’s a bad script, and in my last gig I exposed myself, but hey, a movie starring hand puppets in the age of CGI! How can it miss?

Sincerely,
Jason Segel

the black chick... • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Bwahahahhhha haaa haah haaa!

That was hilarious!

nosephilm • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

MARS looks like such crap it is no wonder that people are running as fast as they can in the other direction.

XMAS CAROL was a creepy dark film that was also criminally loud. As a Disney post production exec said to me after he saw AVATAR: “It makes XMAS CAROL look like sock puppets”

jake • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Interesting that Skyline which had a much better preview and did bad but was THE worst picture of last year and that battle LA had the worst preview but actually did well.

Spacelamb • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

I don’t get why studios spend so much money on making sure animation is so close to photo-realism. A more ‘cartoony’ look is cheaper and, in most cases, more fun. I don’t remember anybody whining that Despicable Me didn’t look exactly true-to-life and that made more than $500M on a $70M-ish production budget. If they’d made it with all that motion-capture malarkey it would have cost twice as much and, taking P&A into consideration, would probably still be in the red, despite that $500M+ gross. Does anybody know why studios do this? BTW, I fucking hate that creepy, dead-eyed look too.

alex • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Only one person really does this, and it’s Robert Zemeckis. Polar Express, Beowulf, A Christmas Carol, etc. Now Mars he didn’t direct, but his studio and team. I worked on three of these, and don’t get the desire to go “hyper real”. I just saw Tangled and thought the animation was amazing, and enjoyed the stylistic look.

777 • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

I hope this racist asshole ( who doesn’t have the courage to put his name up ) is not refering to the tsunami in Japan where thousands of people died, if that’s the case then you’re beyond sick, and evil! I believe Hawaii and CA got hit also, CA is still under declared emergency….perhaps this asshole will go to the beach :)

Rerun • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Um, they are referring to the animation style dumb-ass.

angel • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

This guy Nick sounds ignorant and brain dead! Color 101 class:)….his holiness the Dalai Lama wear red and yellow as signature colors….he is a prophet, some refer to him as the walking god on earth….so you will try to convince people next that number 7 is bad , and you will convince them that 666 is a good number? Nick, you’re a fucking moron! Shut the fuck up!

MARK GEORGEFF • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

SKYLINE directors did a good amount of the SFX on BATTLE. So its no wonder, with a smaller budget and pretty crappy directing, let alone bad script and no big BO stars, SKYLINE didn’t fare as big as BATTLE will. SKYLINE will make a profit if it hasn’t by now when all other ancillaries are taken in. Profit’s a profit I guess. I just think if the script and directing in SKYLINE was done with more concern instead of the rush job it did…it might’ve been better.

sam • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

People actually screamed at the end of skyline that they wanted their money back and I don’t live in those major cities like NYC. It was so terrible.

richard mcenroe • on Mar 12, 2011 10:40 pm

Skyline sucked because it was a pointless movie with pointless people no one, even the actors, got inside flailing around helplessly in an utterly undefined, incomprehensible situation whose only constant was that it would change to make sure any effort or sacrifice on the part of the “protagonists” was futile. It was a boogey-man horror movie, nothing more.

People at the showing of BATTLE:LA I went to reacted to and for the characters; it succeeded in reaching them where SKYLINE didn’t even try.